ADVERTISEMENT

Live feed

Forum list Trending threads

Live feed

 Posts

Gotta admit

V
unlove said:
To put a bow on this thread, I bought my season tickets today. Sure hope the team surprises me.
…but I’m f’n amped for football season!!! 🏈
Click to expand...
Equally pumped for football as well. Never been more excited.

I have been on the fence for basketball season tickets and decided I'm not renewing for the first time in years. I am a student once again so I will just use that option. I don't believe there will be a significant revitalization or massive influx of fans if by some small miracle we make the NCAAs or get a new coach. Plenty of great lower level seats will still be available in the coming years regardless. UNLV basketball is now too far down the local sports consumers' pecking order. It cannot be healed. It cannot be resuscitated. It would need a resurrection. To make this happen the program would need an 8-figure infusion of capital. You need a LOT of money and/or a LOT of luck to get a really good coach. You can ONLY get really good players with a lot of money AND a really good coach. Harsh reality for a department not dripping in cash.

Thankfully we have an AD that understands how important football is to the current and future health of our athletic programs. Most of the working capital will be allocated there. By far our best ROI.
Click to expand...
  • Like
Reactions: RebelScrub, LVRebel2000 and rebel5280

Houston Game

L
reblife702 said:
If the team loses this game, that will speak volumes
Click to expand...
OR Both teams tried to get better in the off season

Edit: to be clear, I think we should at minimum be "in" this game. I have no idea what Houston lost or brought in. I have no idea what changes were made to the staff other than Willie Fritz coming in.

I assume that Houston has a leg up in recruiting, haven't looked at numbers. Losing this game doesn't have to be indicative of anything, other than they lost this game.

More edit: just looked at Houston schedule... we would be dogs in all but 3-4 of their games, I'm guessing
Click to expand...

PAC 8?

dcut03
Loyal Coug1 said:
Well you may be right. But no I don't think the Pac-2 has any clue about anything. Our Commish is weak and learned under Kwackkoff and Scott, our new AD is weak, and President has failed miserably and is a lame duck. I think OSU is sneaking around talking to the Big-12 behind our back.

Taking a 50% cut on our media deal is better than the cut we took for 2024 - basically 100%.
Click to expand...
But again. They have the opportunity to keep things slim and make double the money. Considering they are taking it on the chin right now, chasing the maximum dollar makes even more sense, no? It still is a solid conference that has some options.

A lot of the PAC ineptitude came from the NoCal schools. They shut down any thoughts of expansion because they were so up their own butts about academic perception for an athletic union. Look where they are now. In a pretty stupid spot.

The other part was that USC/UCLA and Oregon and UW were probably gone no matter what. They are getting big time bucks and that is a tough thing to turn down. So of course those schools were going to try to shut down decent media contracts and other things, becuase they new it would cost them money to be poached for greener pastures down the road.
Click to expand...
  • Like
Reactions: TimothyC3 and LVRebel2000

PAC 8?

dcut03
TimothyC3 said:
Put a fork in the ACC in it's current form. Because stable conferences do not have their flagship football programs (Clemson and Florida State) filing lawsuits against the conference and the conference also suing their flagship football programs (Clemson and Florida State).

Also, I don't blame OSU and WSU for kicking the can down the road on the reverse merger. Because once that decision is made they are done and will be a mid-major program. That's why I feel right now for OSU and WSU money is secondary and they are trying to figure out a way to stay relevant and avoid becoming a mid-major program. If it was just about money, why did SMU forego any media rights in the sum of $28.5 mill from the ACC for the first 7 years and and also, give up the $9 mill per year from the AAC. They actually had to raise $200 mill to help fund their athletic program during the interim 7 years. After 40 years they are finally able to get rid of the mid-major label for the time being.

There will be fall out from the ACC implosion and all 17 teams will not find a home in a power conference because after the ACC power programs leave what's left will be no better off than the PAC 8.
Click to expand...
SMU got duped with Stanford and Cal. They decided to blindly follow whatever those NoCal schools were going to do. Now they have some cash flow to afford it right now, but in general it isn't good business to do stuff for free when it is worth millions of dollars.
All of that and ACC may dissolve as well. But those 3 definitely seem to be the exception. Every other move has come with a significant bump in media revenue. Why else would these west coast schools willing get in bed with midwest and east coast teams. It is a burden otherwise.
I'm torn on the ACC. I agree it isn't a good sign when the flagship programs are suing. But that contract is what it is, and they agreed to it. They did it at the time when they thought expansion was stopped. So I'm not convinced it is doomed simply because those are the legal terms, but wouldn't be surprised if some sort of blow up happens either.
I think OSU and WAZZU know that they are mid major now, there really is no way around it. They were left behind.
The saving grace would be a ACC blow up and some sort of union/agreement with them for football. I can see a cross conference championship game with a new PAC and the leftover ACC be good enough to perhaps earn a designated seat in the football playoffs. It would be something between the power conference and G5.
But other than setting up a new PAC 8 that can be augmented later, the only other reason that the PAC 2 would wait would be to hopefully get picked up on the next round of additions. It is a long shot, but waiting to the last minute to pull the trigger on a new PAC or a reverse merger leaves a speck of hope for that.
Click to expand...

PAC 8?

TimothyC3
Put a fork in the ACC in it's current form. Because stable conferences do not have their flagship football programs (Clemson and Florida State) filing lawsuits against the conference and the conference also suing their flagship football programs (Clemson and Florida State).

Also, I don't blame OSU and WSU for kicking the can down the road on the reverse merger. Because once that decision is made they are done and will be a mid-major program. That's why I feel right now for OSU and WSU money is secondary and they are trying to figure out a way to stay relevant and avoid becoming a mid-major program. If it was just about money, why did SMU forego any media rights in the sum of $28.5 mill from the ACC for the first 7 years and and also, give up the $9 mill per year from the AAC. They actually had to raise $200 mill to help fund their athletic program during the interim 7 years. After 40 years they are finally able to get rid of the mid-major label for the time being.

There will be fall out from the ACC implosion and all 17 teams will not find a home in a power conference because after the ACC power programs leave what's left will be no better off than the PAC 8.
Click to expand...
  • Like
Reactions: LVRebel2000

PAC 8?

Loyal Coug1
dcut03 said:
Hey I don't want to underplay the ineptitude of the PAC over the years. There has been some questionable decisions no doubt. Some of those decisions were because the inevitable was going to happen ( teams leaving for greener pastures) and there wasn't much that the commish or the other teams could do about it.

But come on, you don't think the PAC 2 and thier commish has any idea what the worth of these schools are? Once USC and UCLA announced they were leaving, and probably before that, the PAC has been looking at all possible expansion targets, and they got this close to adding SDSU. They have had discussions with all of the major and non major TV/streaming providers for the next media contract.

And then in the past year where everyone bailed, you don't think that the PAC 2 and the new commish has not been trying to exhaust every opportunity on what to do next? They haven' talked to any media partners about scenarios and worth in the past year? They have had multiple discussions with the MW themselves, you don't think they talked about markets and realistic expectations on contracts?

They know exactly their own worth and what every school in the region, and perhaps every school west of the Mississippi and Tulane (that isn't P4 right now) brings to the table.

As for the MW "doing fine" sure they are, especially competitively. But the AAC and the freaking Sunbelt both have better media contracts right now, and they almost both have the MW doubled ( not sure of the AAC since they lost more teams).


It may not be 100% about money, but it is 98% about money. I don't think the PAC 2 to willingly take a 50% paycut on their annual TV deal just because the MW is "doing fine".

Clock is ticking, but it sure looks like they have had a plan for a while. Stay the PAC 2 , play football with the MW and other sports with the WCC then start the new PAC in 2026 where they can potentially get the top MW teams/markets with little to no fees.
Click to expand...
Well you may be right. But no I don't think the Pac-2 has any clue about anything. Our Commish is weak and learned under Kwackkoff and Scott, our new AD is weak, and President has failed miserably and is a lame duck. I think OSU is sneaking around talking to the Big-12 behind our back.

Taking a 50% cut on our media deal is better than the cut we took for 2024 - basically 100%.
Click to expand...
  • Like
Reactions: LVRebel2000

Question for Rebel Fans

dcut03
rebneck said:
You haven't thought about it much because there's nothing to think about on this topic for another ten years and, let's be honest, probably not even then. Barry "Red Moon" Odom will have risen somewhere else by then.
Click to expand...
I get the idea of talking about it. Right now the idea is a bit absurd. We have had one extremely promising season. It was an easy schedule, but we did better in one year than we have seen in 20, arguably 30 years.

Odom could have a similar impact than Tark, and arguably maybe even a bigger impact, but it will take a lot of things to go right for that to happen, with the biggest obstacle is him not leaving for greener pastures.

But if Odom sticks around. We are a regular MW contender for the conference championship and a regular bowl participant. If that success somehow gets the community all in and an invite into the P4, then that could arguable the most significant coaching tenure at least since Tark.

But after one season? Nonsense. But that's what fans like to do. Think about the possibilities.

And we do have reasons to be hopeful. Really good first season, starting to crush the rest of the league with recruiting, and even keeping up with some good power teams? That is crazy in itself.
Click to expand...
  • Like
Reactions: RRebel, j. spilotro, LVRebel2000 and 2 others

Question for Rebel Fans

rebneck
LocoRebel said:
I haven't seen any statue conversation other than in jest. I also have not looked for any... but my thoughts.

If Odom is out after 2 years of success, obviously any conversation of a statue is moot in my opinion. For Tark, it took 20+ years after he was removed from the school of having 20 years of sustained success and 8-10 years of top tier success, and a few years of unmatched national prominence.

To me, statues have to come with time. 2-3 years sustained success in fb at a school like UNLV should get notoriety. To be honest, it would have to be like 10 years of never being below 7-8 wins, and multiple years of 10+ wins in that window, nationally ranked, and something that he commits to long term. 5 years, even if there is a national top 25 ranking, probably doesn't do it, unless they get into the playoff. Then conversation comes.

I haven't thought this out much. But it has to be high achievement over a period of time.
Click to expand...
You haven't thought about it much because there's nothing to think about on this topic for another ten years and, let's be honest, probably not even then. Barry "Red Moon" Odom will have risen somewhere else by then.
Click to expand...
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: RRebel, bcvegaspt, j. spilotro and 1 other person

PAC 8?

dcut03
Loyal Coug1 said:
I like your post, but if you think this: "I'm sure the PAC teams and president know exactly what each MW teams brings to the table financially." then I think you terribly overestimate the stooges that are in the current administration of WSU, The Pac-2 offices and probably OSU.

The more we go round and round and the clock keeps ticking, the more of a no-brainer it is to do the PacMtn-14 full merger. The MW is surviving just fine, arguably (or maybe there is no argument) the best G5 conference. Your revenue is much higher than the AAC, and way higher than the others G5's. The Pac-2 represents the strongest addition that is out there. We have discussed the financial issues with us just joining you (our loss of BB money, being unable to rid yourselves of the BSU premium, etc.) The reverse merger fixes all that. MW schools will overall keep their NCAA and other money, BSU's premium goes away. Pac-2 keeps their money. The P5 ship has sailed for the Pac-2. All we are doing by sitting on our hands is frittering away our money and losing media and NCAA money. The WCC scheduling arrangement was stupid and will cost us. We end up with by far the best G5 conference, we structure in flexibility (as in low exit fees) to allow for future opportunities (that are unlikely to happen), and we have a nice stable conference with only 2 time zones and a lot of nearby schools, which you already enjoy and the Pac-2 would enhance.

Why is this so incomprehensible to some? As paraphrased on my home site - do you grab the nice, cute drunk girl at the bar and take her home, or do you hold out for the hot chick that you probably have no chance at? My vote? The former. My dipshit Cougar brethren? The latter.
Click to expand...

Hey I don't want to underplay the ineptitude of the PAC over the years. There has been some questionable decisions no doubt. Some of those decisions were because the inevitable was going to happen ( teams leaving for greener pastures) and there wasn't much that the commish or the other teams could do about it.

But come on, you don't think the PAC 2 and thier commish has any idea what the worth of these schools are? Once USC and UCLA announced they were leaving, and probably before that, the PAC has been looking at all possible expansion targets, and they got this close to adding SDSU. They have had discussions with all of the major and non major TV/streaming providers for the next media contract.

And then in the past year where everyone bailed, you don't think that the PAC 2 and the new commish has not been trying to exhaust every opportunity on what to do next? They haven' talked to any media partners about scenarios and worth in the past year? They have had multiple discussions with the MW themselves, you don't think they talked about markets and realistic expectations on contracts?

They know exactly their own worth and what every school in the region, and perhaps every school west of the Mississippi and Tulane (that isn't P4 right now) brings to the table.

As for the MW "doing fine" sure they are, especially competitively. But the AAC and the freaking Sunbelt both have better media contracts right now, and they almost both have the MW doubled ( not sure of the AAC since they lost more teams).


It may not be 100% about money, but it is 98% about money. I don't think the PAC 2 to willingly take a 50% paycut on their annual TV deal just because the MW is "doing fine".

Clock is ticking, but it sure looks like they have had a plan for a while. Stay the PAC 2 , play football with the MW and other sports with the WCC then start the new PAC in 2026 where they can potentially get the top MW teams/markets with little to no fees.
Click to expand...
  • Like
Reactions: LVRebel2000

PAC 8?

L
Masked_rebel said:
The ACC isn't going anywhere... it's to expensive for the teams to exit and in exchange they will try and poach traditional ACC schools like Maryland, Rutgers, and add a school like WVU and Central Florida.. again, if anything there will be a redistribution of schools that get traded. It's in their best interests to keep 4 power conferences, having 2 20+ team conferences doesn't make sense and would competitively suck and if that's the case, they'd simply get rid of NCAA and form their own league
Click to expand...
That 2036 GOR is a pretty tough look (unless it gets worked out in court that teams can leave at a fraction of the cost). ACC *should* be stable. Enough regionality and "non-dominant" schools, they should be okay with 2-4 leave. Do FSU and Clemson break the camels back? How about UNC? Miami? NC State? Wake?

Your point remains true. If there are 6-7 that stay committed, just grab WVU, UCF, UConn. Beyond that, I can't think of anyone who would add value. I'm not convinced that UCF or WVU do. But the ACC nucleus *should* be solid. NC State, Wake, BC, Georgia Tech, V-Tech, Pitt, Syracuse, Louisville. I don't feel like they are threat to leave. Maaaaybe Louisville. Maybe.
Click to expand...

PAC 8?

L
dcut03 said:
They don't need UNLV to get Vegas.
Click to expand...
This is something I think people forget. No conference needs UNLV to own the Vegas market. If UNLV has sustained success, then gets invited to a better spot, it comes with new fans. But as is, 3 of the P4 can claim sovereignty over Las Vegas. The Big 10 because of the two LA schools. The Big 12 because of the Arizona schools and the Utah schools, therefore influence by relevance. The SEC owns any major city where they put two of its teams.


Just to divert pack to the concept of a Pac 8... I think I quite like it for (or even a Pac 9, since we are already beyond full regionality due to there not being enough teams in this part of the US, and also since divisions aren't require for conference title game)... Full football round robin, equal and complete scheduling... which you could do with 10, but does it really matter? Pac 8-10 it's doable. Ya know what? Sign me up.

WSU and OSU
BSU and Fresno
UNLV and SDSU
CSU and USU

Then determine with TV partner guidance whether or not it's worth bringing in Wyoming or AFA or 2-4 Texas/Louisiana/elsewhere (Really only UTSA, Tulane, Memphis... maybe a Texas State if you get UTSA... San Marcos and San Antonio are an hour apart, I think that's huge to give them a natural regional rival... they have never shared a conference, at least not in D1A.... Texas State was decent last year, but has been mostly bad in recent history. Like 2-4 wins. They are probably too much dead weight currently.)

...stream of consciousness typing.... Anyway, uhhh... UNLV not needed for Vegas market, and give the Pac 8 a thought...
Click to expand...
  • Like
Reactions: LVRebel2000

PAC 8?

M
The ACC isn't going anywhere... it's to expensive for the teams to exit and in exchange they will try and poach traditional ACC schools like Maryland, Rutgers, and add a school like WVU and Central Florida.. again, if anything there will be a redistribution of schools that get traded. It's in their best interests to keep 4 power conferences, having 2 20+ team conferences doesn't make sense and would competitively suck and if that's the case, they'd simply get rid of NCAA and form their own league
Click to expand...
  • Like
Reactions: LVRebel2000

PAC 8?

Loyal Coug1
TimothyC3 said:
I don’t feel it’s just about the money, which is always very important. Access to the new football playoffs or tourney is also a factor in my opinion. So what happens to the new 5-7. Model adopted after the PAC imploded if the ACC follows the same fate. Because if Clemson, FSU, North Carolina and a few others leave, will there be a new play off with a 4-8 model? Because at that point the ACC left overs will be no better off than a potential PAC 8 in football and the left over ACC schools and champion won’t deserve an auto bid. How is that issue handled?
Click to expand...
Why should "we" care what happens to the ACC orphans? And no, a leftover P4 ACC will not be equivalent to a G5 filled Pac-8. This Pac-8 BS, started by some dumbshit on Twitter, does not deserve any discussion. Derision maybe.
Click to expand...
Load more
ADVERTISEMENT

Filter

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back